Free Republic

Amazing. Reminds of a time some years ago when Popular Mechanics featured a very small scale working V8.

1) I think in the same documentary, the museum director also stated that early M-16 rounds would “swell” in the chamber and cause problems, which resulted in the switch to a chrome chamber (and barrel). The brass rounds didn’t swell, but powder residue would mix with moisture and glue a cartridge in place. Sometimes people mis-speak even when they’re well-versed in the truth. The Army never claimed the whole “wounding” thing about the 5.56mm cartridge. You are correct about the realistic range limitations, though. Soldiers entering the European theater in WWII had to be retrained from taking their time for well-placed shots to providing suppressive fire in support of maneuver. Entire theory on Basic Rifle Marksmanship had to be thrown out once they arrived in the theater.

2) The A2 modification was both a result of the indiscriminate use of FA and the actual effectiveness of FA at the longer ranges anticipated in a “Cold War” scenario. I’ve seen soldiers accidentally “zero” their rifles with a single three-round burst, putting all three rounds into the center of the zero target at 25M. It’s much more effective at long ranges, which doesn’t really help in CQB operations where you may require a large volume of fire in an extremely short distance. That’s why the most current M-4A1 went to Safe/Fire/Auto instead of the burst. And, it was the USMC that was responsible for the development of the M-16A2 after the adoption of the M249 SAW and the heavier 62gr ammunition.

As an aside, I think the 25K round count really wasn’t all the fault of the infantry or the rifles. Vietnam saw a lot of gunships and APCs with 7.62 miniguns and chain guns putting a lot of lead down range, as well. One minute with a minigun will negate the round count of the average platoon.

!) I don't know about any 'long-dispelled hack'. I got that information from a documentary on the M16 and one reason why is was finally accepted by the Army (would the Army lie?). Another 'finding' was that the big Caliber and long range of Main Battle Rifles like the 30-06 M-1 Garrand was no longer necessary as most firefights during WWII took place at 200 yards max, not 600 yards and the M16 fit that bill.

2) My ref to the Army 'bean counters' and ammo was why the A2 was modified to the Three Round Burst after Vietnam. 25,000 rounds per kill or 100,000 rounds used in Nam, the point is the same - the Army bean counters wanted to reduce the cost of ammo used and 'wasted' (Sunday Night on the Military Channel the 25,000 round per kill number was used).

Good post.
In 16 years of military service and over 25 years of personal shooting with the AR-15 platform, I’ve never had a malfunction induced by carbon fouling.

Every failure, with the exception of one broken extractor pin, has been a failure to feed (FTF) caused by the magazine. Some were double feeds and a few were cases where the cartridge over-rode the gas tube in the chamber.

Switching to new and tested mags solved 99% of the problems I’ve experienced.

Does footnote #2 actually attempt to revive the long-dispelled hack that the M-16 and ammo was “designed to wound”? While the 7.62mm had greater penetration, the thick jacket created an even greater “ice pick” effect on soft tissue. The thin-jacketed 55gr rounds had much better fragmentation and yawing within the target, with better terminal performance.

And #1 contradicts itself in concept. The “bean counters” had nothing to do with the size of the 5.56mm cartridge and bullet. The 25,000rnd figure (I’ve seen 100,000rnds per kill) came about AFTER the introduction of the M-16. And, the M-16 wasn’t designed to save ammo, but to allow the soldier to lay down a GREATER volume of fire with their “basic load”. The M-14 that preceded it had a paltry basic load and was ineffective in automatic fire.

I’ve still got a few Vietnam-era 20rnd mags.
Some people call them “collector” mags, but they work OK.
I even retrifitted a Gen I MagPul follower into one of them and it’s top notch.

Same here, I've fired a lot of rifles over my life and career, and by far the AR variant is my favorite (although I punched it up to 7.62X39 for a little more power) and everyone that has fired the rifle loves it. The only thing left is to install the direct blowback system.

Cleaning is key... I used to hammer it into the guys to clean it... clean it well and clean it often! do it and the malfunctions will be minimal

You forgot the Sarc tag... Unless they've changed their MO the customer service sucked at C-products... from lack of notification on order status, to some downright deceptive stuff earlier this year (you make your order and on the very last send page you find out that its back ordered or six to eight weeks), then contacting them is another thing, except for one person a month ago, most contacts including the VP were rude and condescending.

Although the product (7.62x39 AR mags) seems well made and operate good. But, I was not at all pleased with the service. I have ordered equipment from there twice, I will make one more order after talking to the last company rep., after that we'll see.